Teens, tech and entrepreneurs

Last week I attended an event organized by SDForum, called Next Generation Tech: Teens Plugged In. I must commend the organizers for pulling together a very interesting event. Instead of the usual talking heads, they had (separate) panels of high-schoolers and college kids who pretty much held court for most of the morning. It was a most refreshing change.

The purpose was to hear teens' views on technology (and also entrepreneurship). The teens were certainly fully plugged in, all inseparable from their cell phones and iPods, and incredulous that folks grew up without the Internet. But what was most telling is that they consider all of the above as merely tools, a way for them to do what they've always wanted to do: hang out with friends, listen to music or get their work done faster and easier - just what teenagers have done for ages. In fact, even the young man who fessed up to using the above-mentioned devices to help in a test was just updating the hoary cheat sheet. And as always, there are the kids that keep to the rules and those that break them and like to keep pushing the envelope. Technology hasn't fundamentally changed their behavior or values, but it has vastly increased the scope and impact.

It was also interesting to see what a difference a few years made - the college kids were more serious about technology, even when discussing the same topic of cell phones as the teens. It may be because more than half seemed to be CS majors - and I was disappointed that there were no women in the college panel, unlike the well balanced high school panel.

There were a couple of high school and college entrepreneurs there too. Most interesting was Ben Casnocha, who kicked off the session. He's still a teenager though his company is 6 years old, and he was asked to comment on the differences between the young and not-so-young entrepreneurs. His take was there was too much hyper-ventilation on the subject; the reality is that it all comes down how well you work with people, and age is not the determining factor. He spoke very perceptively on this and other subjects; seems like those six years packed a lot of experience.

This event was doubly interesting to me as just the previous week I'd heard a bunch of teenagers pitching their business plans (see post). The previous one featured at-risk kids from dodgy neighborhoods, and their mentors used entrepreneurship to help them finish high school and motivate them to aspire to college. At the SDForum teen tech event the kids were from top suburban schools, where entrepreneurship is often a passion, and a ticket to the Ivies. Until we see the under-resourced teens start pitching business ideas based on technology, like the ones in the tech event are pursuing, we know we still have the 'digital divide' in our country, and it needs attention, especially from those of us in tech arena.

The entrepreneurial incentive

Last weekend I was a judge at the Youth Business Plan competition at BUILD. I've written about their organization and founder/CEO in a previous post, and I'm always excited by what they do as they blend two my favorite interests, entrepreneurship and education, to make a difference in the life of hundreds of kids. In short, they take the kids who're at risk of dropping out of high school and get them studying, graduating and even getting into college by using the hook of starting their own business venture. During this process they learn about biz plans and everything that entails, and get to present to a group of judges, with winning plans getting funding (upto $1000) and incubator privileges. This is not too far off from what we far more seasoned entrepreneurs do. It was amazing to see the poise with which these high school freshmen handled questions about their competition, execution timeline, operating costs etc. from the judges (who were the de facto investors group).

There were some other very interesting parallels between the high-tech startups and the businesses pitched by the kids.

  • Variations on a theme. There were a ton of t-shirt concepts, similar to the current 'social networking' flood, which made the rare 'planter' idea stand out.
  • Prototypes have punch. The best-received plans all had a sample/prototype that could be seen and touched.
  • Passion matters. The teams that showed the most enthusiasm, as a team, not just individuals, got more points.
  • Preparation is critical. The teams that had done the most up-front work seemed most likely to follow through on execution.
  • Feasibility trumps. Though some teams had more interesting ideas, or more compelling 'CEOs', or better ROIs, the winning team was the one that seemed most likely to succeed on execution, demonstrated by how well they handled every aspect of the presentation, from attire and eye-contact to market research and sales plans. They showed preparation, passion and a clear understanding of how they will make what the customers want and how to sell to them. Like any other venture, they were the safest bet for the investor - the dream of every entrepreneur.
  • Social networking is everything. They were all going to use MySpace and Facebook to get the word out - in their case, it was real.

This was the most fun I've had with business plans lately. The future's brighter because of organizations like BUILD - check them out, you may find it interesting and maybe end up helping them.

The stealth mode startup

I'm betting 8 out of 10 startups begin by being in the 'stealth' mode (that's based on a scientifically conducted multi-year study of course). Most of the entrepreneurs I run into, who've just launched companies, are quick to claim they're stealth, or 'under the radar' - that's true for moi too - and it can persist for quite a while.

So why do entrepreneurs like me go 'stealth'? It's primarily because they don't want anyone else ripping off their idea. This presumably changes when they've got enough funding, staffing and traction that it doesn't matter - or more likely, when publicity is required to build traction. Of course that begs the question, is your idea that easy to rip off? Don't you have some deep, complex IP that takes six PhDs six years to construct? Not so much in the web world, and not even in the enterprise arena. And entrepreneurs are a paranoid bunch - and often need to be so. (I admit to sometimes using the 'stealth' term as a cop out since I don't really want to discuss it with a given person or group - a negative vibe thing.) So 'stealth' is understandable, accepted and occasionally considered glamorous and attractive, especially if you're stealth even after VC funding.

But there's a down side to stealth. There's not enough info about your venture to get people excited. And you and your team are constantly weighing what to say and to whom. Investors don't do NDAs, and standard business practices don't always favor the early stage entrepreneur. You can pick who you pitch to, but can't bet they're in the clear - for all you know, they might be doing due diligence on a competitor, and you're it. (That's another topic though.) What about potential candidates? In a tough market, what you do is an important part of the mix. How much can you tell? I did a previous post on this - TMI - and this is continuation on the musings.

The website is another big challenge. Usually people look at the website to get an idea of the company - not just what it is about, but what it is like. Most stealth ones say very little. Are you missing a key hiring edge? This is a question my team is struggling with right now. How can we make ourselves interesting without revealing too much. Not very easy to do, as we can't even look at other similar startups to see how they've handled it (they're in stealth, duh). But we're at least decided on what it should have: much ado about nothing.